Categories
United States of America

July 7, 1979 – climate memo on Carter’s desk

Forty seven years ago, on this day, July  7th, 1979, a ,memo lands on President Jimmy Carter’s desk from his chief scientific adviser, Frank Press –

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/14/1977-us-presidential-memo-predicted-climate-change

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was Lyndon Johnson was the first US president to warn about carbon dioxide build-up, in early 1965 (thanks to the work of Roger Revelle etc).  Between then and 1979, the science had become a lot firmer, especially from the mid-1970s.

The specific context was that various scientists (including Alvin Weinberg) had been beavering away, holding conferences, lobbying Frank Press, etc etc, trying to get the issue onto the agenda.

This met headwinds though, because the Carter Administration also wanted to reduce dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and was pursuing making oil from shale, which would be a climate catastrophe. 

What I think we can learn from this. The second half of the 1970s – fully fifty years ago, is the key period when a community of scientists – not just climatologists – started going “oh shit”.  You can read all about them in William Barbat’s CO2 Newsletter…

What happened next. Press chided Gus Speth of the Council on Environmental Quality for continuing to bang on about carbon dioxide build-up. Carter lost the 1980 election. Reagan the wrecking ball came in, and the last slender chance of avoiding catastrophe was gone. Oh well. 

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

July 30, 1979 – synfuels would be sinful…

May 5, 1980 – Frank Press to Jimmy Carter on climate

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 7, 1969 – Newsweek writes about the “good earth,” mentions carbon dioxide build-up

July 7, 1970 – an Australian banker goes “Full Extinction Rebellion”, 50 years early…

July 7, 1988 – foolish “Jumping the greenhouse gun” editorial in Nature.

July 7, 1992 – Greenhouse Action Australia briefing  

July 7, 1997 – Alexander Downer tells the truth.

July 7, 2008 – Liberals start back-tracking on climate promises.

Categories
Brazil United Kingdom

July 6, 1979 – Letter in the Nottingham Post about carbon dioxide build-up and “the greatest disaster in world history”

Forty seven  years ago, on this day, July 6th, 1979, a letter was published in the Nottingham Post, written by one K. Cooke, of Aspley.

“When hundreds of millions of trees are destroyed in the Amazon forests, as they have been over the past 65 years, the whole world suffers a loss of oxygen and an increase in carbon dioxide.

The deforestation of tropical rain forests and the wiping out of numerous species of animals and plants, produce harmful effects on the climate of the world and the balance of nature.

A Brazilian scientist says: “We are threatened with possibly the greatest ecological disaster in world history.”


But also, check out that advert!!

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was there had been stories in newspapers (and magazines) about carbon dioxide build-up from the 1950s.  From the late 1960s, those stories started to get a bit firmer in their concerns.  Through the 1970s, scientists beavered away.  The idea that the climate was changing (either hotter or colder!) was common currency, and the 1976 heatwave/drought in Europe had got people talking. 

The specific context was that the First World Climate Conference had happened in February, and the reporting on it in the UK had usually talked about carbon dioxide build-up. By this time even Margaret Thatcher had gone public (though privately deriding the idea) because it enabled her to advocate for nuclear power (see her interview with the BBC at the G7 in Tokyo on June 29). 

What I think we can learn from this – the whole topic was tolerably well-understood by intelligent and well-informed people in the 1970s. The signal had not emerged from the noise ecologically, but smart humans can spot the patterns. The wilfully ignorant, well, not so much.

What happened next

The problem finally became an issue in 1988. Then they bullshitting and kayfabe started. 

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 6, 1972 – “Workers and the Environment” conference in London…

July 6, 1988 – Piper Alpha blows up 

July 6, 1993 – Australian bipartisanship on climate? Not really…

July 6, 2008 – Southern Cross Coalition launches “towards an effective and fair response to climate change” 

Categories
Australia Denial

July 5, 2000 – Centre for “Independent” Studies at peak intellectual capacity

Twenty six years ago, on this day, July 5th 2000,

“In the Courier-Mail on July 5 2000, another luminary from the Centre for Independent Studies, Barry Maley, argued that “Australia should heed a petition opposing the [Kyoto] treaty signed by over 17,000 American scientists.”

This sign-on internet petition includes the signatures of “Dr Jerri Halliwell” (a.k.a. Ginger Spice), and Drs Burns, Honeycutt and Pierce — from the television sit-com MASH. “ https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/climate-conference-cook-books

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 370ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Australia had, in the very first days of the upsurge of international environmental policymaking (mid-1980s) been a responsible and effective ‘middle-power’.  But by the early 1990s, especially on climate change, that was fading fast.

Meanwhile, in the US, various nutjobs – well-funded – mostly suffering Relevance Deprivation Syndrome – were launching ‘sand in the eyes’ tactics, like the Oregon Petition.

The specific context was the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by Australia was a hot topic. It was pretty clear that under Liberal Prime Minister John Howard Australia would NOT ratify the Kyoto Protocol (even though it had extorted an incredibly generous deal) unless the USA did.  But it’s always good to lay down suppressing fire.

Most climate denial bullshit was spewed out by the other right-wing ‘think’tank, the IPA. The CIS didn’t usually enter the fray, but for whatever reason they did here.

What I think we can learn from this

Well, I can say it without fear of libel or being forced to make an apology, now that Maley is finally dead (last year, aged 99).  He may or may not have known what he was talking about within his field –  I haven’t bothered to look – but on this he was a pathetic fucking idiot, and his willingness not to do due diligence on a stupid petition (derided even at the time) says something about his sloppiness and willingness to believe whatever he wanted to believe. “Independent” my very fat arse.

What happened next

Australia under Howard resolutely resisted Kyoto, partnering with the Bush Administration to try to launch a spoiler organisation.  Eventually, under Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd Australia DID ratify Kyoto. For what that was worth (a bucket of warm spit).

The Centre for ‘Independent’ Studies continues in its wretched Atlas ways.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 5, 1973 – The Predicament of Mankind discussed

July 5, 1989 – Nuclear tries to regain some credibility, latching on to greenhouse

July 5, 1989 – Bob Hawke launches a book 

July 5, 2013 – that turd Michael Gove …drops plans to drop climate from curriculum

Categories
Activism Australia

July 4, 1971 – Ecology Action puff piece in Sydney Morning Herald

Fifty five years ago, on this day, July 4th, 1971, a new eco-group gets some publicity in the Sydney Morning Herald.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 325ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that from late 1969 Australia (as part of a global trend) experienced increased alarm about environmental problems.  Various factors, including the publication of the Torrey Canyon, Population Bomb, the Earthrise photo, the Santa Barbara oil spill and action in the US.  New groups had been forming through the 1960s (e.g. the Australian Conservation Society), mostly arranged around the idea of politely lobbying.

The specific context was that there were various local struggles going on in Sydney and New South Wales (Clutha etc) and it was pretty clear that the government of Robin Askew was in no mood to pretend to be at all green.  (It was famously corrupt, even by NSW standards). 

What I think we can learn from this

People could see the ordinary ways weren’t gonna cut it.

What happened next

Ecology Action lasted about ten years. I looked through its newsletters at the National Library of Australia, back in the day.  Virtually nothing (as you’d expect) on carbon dioxide build-up.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

Jim Hagan (1972) Clutha: The politics of pollution, Politics, 7:2, 136-148, DOI:

10.1080/00323267208401287

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 4, 1957 – popular UK magazine The Listener mentions carbon dioxide build-up

July 4, 1989 – UK Energy Committee ponders greenhouse implications 

July 4, 1996 – article in Nature saying ‘it’s partly us’

July 4, 2004 – @WWF_Australia try to shame John Howard into #climate action…

July 4, 2008 – Garnaut’s draft report released  

Categories
Carbon Dioxide Removal

July 3, 2020 – Daily Mail on DAC

Six years ago, on this day, July  3rd, 2020, the Daily Mail published a puff piece about a technofantasy ‘Direct Air Capture’.

  • The PM’s advisor wants to spend £100 million on direct air capture technology
  • The technology uses chemical filters to capture CO2 from the surrounding air
  • The greenhouse gas is then stored underground or reused by various industries
  • But the system is energy-sapping and doesn’t encourage a switch to renewables

Boris Johnson’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings is backing a scheme to suck carbon dioxide out of the air using technology first used on World War Two submarines.

The PM’s advisor wants to spend £100 million on ‘direct air capture’ (DAC) machines, which consist of a stack of metal ‘air scrubbers’ that use a chemical solution to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere.

The CO2-laden solution is then stored underground, reducing the amount of the greenhouse gas that reaches the atmosphere.

,Boyle, D. and Chadwick, J. 2020. Scheme backed by Dominic Cummings to ‘suck’ excess carbon dioxide from the air and bury it underground gets £100m from the Treasury. The Daily Mail, July 3

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 421ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context is that for fifty years now we have been coming up with outlandish technofixes for a basic problem – we have to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide we EMIT.  End of pipe solutions – CCS and DAC – are fantasies. If they weren’t, we’d have them by now.

DAC as fantasy goes back to the late 1990s. I mean, christ.

The specific context was that there was a pandemic going on and fantastic sums of money were being thrown around. Also, Dom Cummings is not quite as smart as he thinks.

What I think we can learn from this – We are going to die.  Horribly. Oh well. 

What happened next

Loads of UK tax payer money is indeed being thrown against the wall on DAC.

You cannae change the laws of physics.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/direct-air-capture-and-greenhouse-gas-removal-innovation-programme-selected-projects/direct-air-capture-and-greenhouse-gas-removal-innovation-programme-phase-1-projects

https://www.missionzero.tech/lab-notes/our-second-direct-air-capture-plant

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 3, 1986 – House of Lords debate about the atmosphere and fuel use…

July 3, 1988 – US Navy kills hundreds of Iranian civilians…

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace occupies an Australian coal plant.

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace activists enter New South Wales coal power station

July 3, 2012 – Emerson stands by “Horror Movie” performance 

Categories
Canada Scientists

 July 2, 1988 – end of the third meeting of the AGGG

Thirty eight  years ago, on this day, July  2nd, 1988, 

End of the third meeting of the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG), Toronto  (By then, IPCC was in process of creation.  See Agrawala GEC 1999 article-)

“The AGGG was established in 1986, two years prior to the IPCC, almost immediately after climate change emerged on the international political agenda. Following Downs (1972), this was the “alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm stage” within the issue-attention cycle of the global climate regime. The AGGG initially functioned in an almost utopian era where a small network of experts, international organizations and environmental advocacy groups had a near monopoly both on the international science and policy agenda. Unlike the IPCC, excessive governmental vetting or backlash from powerful industrial lobbies did not encumber the AGGG. The advisory group spawned creative goals to address climate change: setting “tolerable rates” of temperature increase which ought not be exceeded, as well as the establishment of emissions targets in terms of percentage cuts from baseline levels. Yet, as the political and economic costs of action on climate change began to take center-stage (the next stage in the Downs issue-attention cycle), the AGGG began to experience a steady attrition in the ranks of its core participants and failed to sustain interest among its institutional sponsors. It reached a comatose state by 1990 in which it has existed ever since, in complete obscurity. The scientific and political spotlight meanwhile has focused almost exclusively on the IPCC.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 351ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that there had been scientists banging on about climate change for quite a while (there’s a doozy of a 1977 letter I will publish on November 30th – bet you can’t wait!).

The specific context was that the Toronto conference on the Changing Atmosphere had just finished. The AGGG folks were probably knackered, since a bunch of them had been very heavily involved in organising that.

What I think we can learn from this is that we are smart enough to identify the problems, and, on a good day, to turn them into issues. To fix them? Not so much…

What happened next

AGGG dies, basically:

“Toronto marked the beginning of the end of the AGGG. Many of its o¦cial members, already playing marginal roles, now dropped out entirely (Table 1)”

November 3, 1990 – money for independent climate scientists? Yeah, nah

 (though the implication in Agrawala’s article is that it stumbled on for a decade?)

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

Agrawala, S. (1999)   Early science-policy interactions in climate change: lessons from the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases. Global Environmental Change 9, 157-169

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 2, 1952 – Rachel Carson says Arctic warming

July 2, 1988 – Scientists warn of devastation…

July 2, 1993. Denialists versus the facts, again.

July 2, 2001 – NRDC blasts “Bush” plan to increase reliance on coal – All Our Yesterdays 

July 2, 2007 – Australia learns it has been left “High & Dry” on #climate change

July 2, 2013 – Boris Johnson, expert on energy systems, attacks windfarms

July 2, 2013 – Ignorant man who became prime minister disses wind farms

Categories
Australia

July 1, 2013 – Solastalgia in front of the courts

Thirteen years ago, on this day, July  1st, 2013 –  court case hinging on a neologism…

Abstract: In 2005, Professor Glenn Albrecht wrote in this journal about the concept of ‘solastalgia’, a phenomenon he had witnessed and researched in the Upper Hunter Valley in Australia following the rapid expansion of open-cut coal mining. A combination of the concepts of solace and desolation, Albrecht’s neologism attempted to capture the distress and suffering experienced by people when their place of residence was threatened by significant environmental transformation. In 2013, the concept came before the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, in the case of Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc v Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Warkworth Mining Limited [2013] NSWLEC 48. In this case, the Court overturned a government decision to approve an application to expand the Mount Thorley-Warkworth coal mine. The Court held that the expansion of the mine would have had significant negative impacts upon the community and the environment, which would not have been outweighed by the projected economic benefits to be gained. The decision was heralded as a triumph of David over Goliath; indeed, it has been rare for major development approvals of this kind to be subsequently overturned by the Court. 

SOLASTALGIA – Glenn Albrecht case  https://bridges.monash.edu/articles/A_case_of_place_Solastalgia_comes_before_the_court/4315151

See also 

Bulga Milbrodale Progress Association Inc. v. Minister for Planning and Infrastructure and Warkworth Mining Limited – The Climate Litigation Database 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 396ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that we have been changing – and more recently destroying – everything around us. It’s what we hairless murder apes do.  And we forget the past because of shifting baseline syndrome.

January 10, 1991 – “Separate studies rank 1990 as world’s warmest year”  #ShiftingBaseline

The specific context was the pillaging of Australia is resisted, on the ground and in the courts.  Sometimes – too rarely – the ‘good guys’ win a partial victory.

What I think we can learn from this – a good neologism can help, not just cognitively, but, wow, legally.

What happened next

Haven’t looked. Usually the companies keep plugging away, eventually win by attrition. Have looked – seems to have – https://www.woodmac.com/reports/coal-warkworth-coal-mine-16458529/

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 1, 1950 – “Is the World Getting Warmer?” asks Saturday Evening Post

July 1, 1957- A key “year” in climate science begins…

July 1, 1959 – Gilbert Plass article on climate change published in Scientific American

July 1, 1983 – Australian High Court “saves” Franklin River (it woz the activists wot won it)

July 1, 1984 – CSIRO film “What to do about C02?”

July 1, 1999 – GEODISC gets green light 

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

July 1, 2012 – Australian ETS comes into effect

Fourteen years ago, on this day, July  1st, 2012, 

Australian emissions trading scheme comes into effect. See here.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 394ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that the idea of putting a price on carbon dioxide because of its global warming impacts was hardly new. In 1988 the Science Minister Barry Jones had suggested as much (not that he was at the centre of policymaking around this stuff, unfortunately).  There had been several efforts to get it accepted, and lots of resistance from the mining companies etc (somebody should write a PhD thesis about this).

Finally, a woman was left to clear up the messes…

The specific context was that in the first half of 2011 an extraordinary campaign – spilling over into all sorts of misogyny, lies, vituperation, bullshit economic modelling – was launched against the Gillard ETS scheme.  However, in September 2011 her legislation passed through both houses of Parliament and became law.

What I think we can learn from this – even the mildest and most straightforward responses to the climate threat (and there is so so much more to be done beyond putting a price on carbon) have been rendered virtually impossible thanks to the resistance by some of the worst people on the planet. Oh well.

(As a very smart friend, who proofreads these posts commented – “the example of ETS mostly is a significant piece of evidence that the carbon lobby/incumbents have a documented history of losing their minds, going to any lengths to prevent ‘even the mildest and most straightforward responses,  etc. etc.” 

What happened next

Gillard’s ETS did, perhaps, help to push emissions down (or was that simply Tasmanian hydro coming onto the grid? People will argue).  And then, in 2013 the Liberal National coalition came to power, led by Tony Abbott. He got rid of the emissions trading scheme. Australia still doesn’t have a real price on carbon dioxide.  Oh well.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

March 23, 2011 – Ditch the Witch rally in Canberra

References

Power Failure by Phillip Chubb

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 1, 1950 – “Is the World Getting Warmer?” asks Saturday Evening Post

July 1, 1957- A key “year” in climate science begins…

July 1, 1959 – Gilbert Plass article on climate change published in Scientific American

July 1, 1983 – Australian High Court “saves” Franklin River (it woz the activists wot won it)

July 1, 1984 – CSIRO film “What to do about C02?”

July 1, 1999 – GEODISC gets green light 

Categories
United States of America

July 1, 1983 – Bucky Fuller dies

Forty three years ago, on this day, July  1st, 1983, Bucky Fuller died.

Richard Buckminster Fuller Jr. (/ˈfʊlər/; July 12, 1895 – July 1, 1983)[1] was an American architect, systems theorist, writer, designer, inventor, philosopher, and futurist. He styled his name as R. Buckminster Fuller in his writings, publishing more than 30 books and coining or popularizing such terms as “Spaceship Earth“, “Dymaxion” (e.g., Dymaxion house, Dymaxion car, Dymaxion map), “ephemeralization“, “synergetics“, and “tensegrity“.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 343ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Fuller, along with Lewis Mumford, was one of those ‘he’s a kinda interesting thinker’ people I was encountering in my teens and early 20s (mis-spent and long long gone youth) – as per Terry Pratchett, “inside every old person is a young person wondering what happened.” 

In her wonderful book Wholly Round Rasa Gustaitis has a really good section on Fuller.

You can read a memoir of hers here – https://www.rasagustaitis.com/blog/blog-post-title-two-5yhzl-y6xwt-ysw2w-zgnfk-3ynym-yra8g-k6pln-h694d-bhmme-3reey-whjes-4g5bl-mtscb-eplya-2gjah-4lxxw-ksl6n

Meanwhile, Buckminsterfullerines get a run in the brilliant film Robinson in Space.

What I think we can learn from this

Fuller, Mumford, Gregory Bateson, Stafford Beer, Ursula Le Guin, Donatella Meadows, Ilya Prigonine and the rest of the systems people deserve more of my attention.

What happened next

Somebody set up a Buckminster Fuller Institute.

 There is also this – https://www.buckyverse.org/en/a_fuller_explanation/index

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 1, 1950 – “Is the World Getting Warmer?” asks Saturday Evening Post

July 1, 1957- A key “year” in climate science begins…

July 1, 1959 – Gilbert Plass article on climate change published in Scientific American

July 1, 1983 – Australian High Court “saves” Franklin River (it woz the activists wot won it)

July 1, 1984 – CSIRO film “What to do about C02?”

July 1, 1999 – GEODISC gets green light 

Categories
Australia

June 30, 2007 – “High and Dry” excerpted

Nineteen years ago, on this day, June 30th, 2007

Excerpts of Guy Pearse’s book High and Dry in “Good Weekend” newspaper supplement

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 384ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context for this was that that Guy Pearse was a nice young capital-L Liberal activist who, in 1988 had gone to the United States on a kind of exchange to work with a Republican, and then quickly realised that the Republican wasn’t interested in the same stuff that he was, and had ended up working briefly for Al Gore’s failed Democratic presidential nomination bid. He had further switched on to environment, and especially greenhouse. He had tried to offer his services back in Australia. This had not really worked, because while the ACF was up for it, the Liberals were not – they felt they had been ‘stabbed in the back’ by the greenies. 

He had then done a PhD, part time at Australian National University. It is a brilliant PhD, in my opinion, it is based on extensive interviews with people who were his mates in lobbying for various different industries against any greenhouse regulation. They called themselves the “greenhouse mafia”, which was distinct, of course, from the AIGN. 

Anyway, his PhD thesis formed the inspiration/basis for a Four Corners documentary on ABC television in 2006. And he wrote a big fat book that was an expansion and extension of his thesis. Well, it’s actually different. It’s up, but it’s on the same topic about John Howard and Howard’s resistance to climate policy. Very good book, in my opinion. 

The specific context was that by mid-2007 you couldn’t move but for articles about climate change, almost 20 years after the first wave. 

What I think we can learn is this: that newspapers have acres of space to fill, and they also need to give their readers the sense or pretence that their finger is on the pulse. And so you’ll see newspapers publishing stuff that might not be a close enough ideological fit for their owners (but in any case, usually the control is a little less heavy-handed than that sentence would imply, at least in parts of the West).

What happened next: Pearse kept being active on climate stuff for a few years, but ultimately withdrew because it was obvious that we as a species we’re fucking doomed. Guy Pearse did more than most, and deserves all the credit for that, in my opinion.

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

June 30, 1988 – Toronto conference on “Our Changing Atmosphere” ends  

June 30, 2006 – Australian CCS inquiry launched

June 30, 2008 – Judge stops a coal-burning power plant getting built.

June 30, 2010 – CCS will be at 5GW by 2020. (nope).